首页> 外文期刊>Journal of contingencies and crisis management >Should the shady steal thunder? The effects of crisis communication timing, pre-crisis reputation valence, and crisis type on post-crisis organizational trust and purchase intention
【24h】

Should the shady steal thunder? The effects of crisis communication timing, pre-crisis reputation valence, and crisis type on post-crisis organizational trust and purchase intention

机译:阴暗的地方应该偷雷吗?危机沟通时机,危机前声誉价和危机类型对危机后组织信任和购买意愿的影响

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

A scenario-based 2 (communication timing: stealing thunder vs. thunder)x2 (pre-crisis reputation valence: positive vs. negative)x2 (crisis type: product-harm vs. moral-harm) between-subjects experiment was implemented with 273 Dutch participants to address the question of whether or not the positive effects of stealing thunder depend on pre-crisis reputation valence and crisis type. Statistical analyses reveal that stealing thunder by an organization with a positive pre-crisis reputation results in higher post-crisis trust and purchase intention levels than stealing thunder by an organization with a negative pre-crisis reputation. Moreover, crisis type interacts with crisis communication timing in influencing post-crisis trust and purchase intention, as stealing thunder works better than thunder during a product-harm crisis.
机译:基于场景的2(交流时间:偷雷vs.雷声)x2(危机前声誉价:正面与负面)x2(危机类型:产品-危害与道德-危害)受试者间实验采用273荷兰与会者讨论了偷雷的积极影响是否取决于危机前的声誉价和危机类型的问题。统计分析表明,与危机前声誉为负的组织窃取雷电相比,危机前声誉为正的组织窃取雷声会导致更高的危机后信任和购买意愿水平。此外,危机类型会与危机沟通时机相互作用,从而影响危机后的信任和购买意愿,因为在产品危害危机中,偷电打雷比打雷效果更好。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号